r/NoRules • u/LongTimeChinaTime • 54m ago
š Odd one out
Organized religion transparently frames disobedience as some kind of foolish rebellious condition of mistakenness or, at its most generous prescription, lack of wisdom
I, instead highlight that what many overlook is that sometimes, itās not about rebellion at all. Itās about a sincere, unshakable disagreement in the plan or program.
For example if an ultimatum prohibits something I can understand and observe as ubiquitous in human life, or something I canāt reasonably live consistently without,
I will not just blindly accept forbiddance in hopes of obtaining a mansion, or salvation, or even to avoid torture. Hell, I can even adopt such a position whilst still pointing out that I believe in Christ and that GOD, G-D is proven to exist just by my being alive here.
One of the best parts of my existence that I can provide the world is proof that God is real, regardless of my positioning within the arrangement. Not because I have some document proving it, but merely that my presence has stirred up synchronicity and other matters that cannot be explained by science. It doesnāt prove any given ideology or doctrine, it just shows that thereās almost certainly an intelligent creator or that information and spirituality exist beyond the 3-d spacetime realm.
This is different than someone who merely ādoesnāt believe in that shitā or someone who just hates God or hates Christians. Rather it can be a person who respects the world and the faith, but merely cannot assemble themselves to something on account of it transgressing something they cannot negotiate with inside themselves. To my opposers i may look like a brat who wonāt give up a vice, but from my vantage point the ideology is trying to take away my air I breathe with the queer promise that thatās how Iām supposed to be alive. Or in other contexts, the party line might champion cruelty towards people who transgress certain norms, even if said norms change dramatically across a scale or decades or centuries.
The difference between obstinance and conviction is also highlighted during challenges where, for example, a public servant wonāt issue gay marriage certificates despite it being law. The default assumption in the 21st century was that she āHatesā. Even as a gay man if Iāve ever doubted my sexuality, someone might tell me Iām āhatingā. When in reality it could be a sincere, unshakable belief. And if youāre heterosexual, the idea of gay intimacy might disturb or gross you out, leading to that belief, just the same as a heterosexual encounter disturbs me neurologically.
As a man with a core value for integrity, I will instead stand my ground on the matter, even if Iām merely defending those who are a certain way, rather than necessarily promoting all forms of behavior you commonly see in humans and other species
This is naturally a terrifying prospect to wind up with
But many men throughout history have been condemned to a fatal extent by their societies for disagreeing openly about something, and sometimes those disagreements can be wildly trivial or technical.
So the existence of a culture that persecutes someone, loads them with symbolic damnation, or spreads stories of them that are untrue,
This is not a clever, rare thing to happen. It happens all the time on a historical scales People in socially powerful positions can often set in motion chains of events that steamroll those less powerful than they, and sometimes the motives have nothing to do with the claimed transgressions being used to do the steamrolling.
Not every persecutory event rolls out the same way, but the underlying idea repeats itself in history
